Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump Blocked from Shredding Evidence in Final Moments

Episode Date: April 20, 2026

Of course a president who was once indicted for committing espionage and obstruction by taking presidential papers with him to Mar a Lago, would find a way to argue he has the right to destroy all presidential papers now. In breaking news, a new emergency preliminary injunction has been filed to effectively stop Trump from destroying not only Presidential records, but the National Archive itself, as its reported that the Trump Administration refused to commit to doing either while a lawsuit challenging his refusal to recognize the validity of the Presidential Records Act continues. Popok reports. Bull Shot: Text LEGAL20 to 64000 for up to 20% off plus free shipping. Message and data rates may apply. Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This podcast is sponsored by Talkspace. Last year, I went through many different life changes. I needed to take a pause and examine how I was feeling in the inside to better show up for the ones who need me to be my best version of myself. When you're navigating life's changes, Talkspace can help. Talkspace is the number one rated online therapy, bringing you professional support from licensed therapists and psychiatry providers that you can access anytime, anywhere.

Living a busy life, navigating a long-distance relationship, becoming a first stepfather, Talkspace made all of those journeys possible. I could speak with my therapist in the office. I could speak with my therapist in the comfort of my home. I was never alone. Talkspace works with most major insurers, and most insured members have a $0. No insurance, no problem. Now get $80 off your first month with promo code Space 80 when you go to Talkspace.com.

Match with a licensed therapist today at Talkspace.com. Save $80 with code space 80 at Talkspace.com. This podcast is supported by the original organic bedding and bath brand, Koyuchi. So April is Earth Month. And one way you can celebrate and support our planet is by making small changes that actually matter, like switching to brands that support sustainable living. Koyuchi has spent 35 years pioneering quality organic sheets, bedding, and bath towels, all with a focus on responsible sourcing and manufacturing.

Plus, Koyuchi products contain zero harsh chemicals or dangerous toxins that can seep into your skin. Koyuchi's crisp, cool, luxuriously soft sheets are ethically made and certified fair trade, with naturally breathable, pre-washed organic cotton. So this Earth month, make a small yet stylish upgrade that actually matters to your health and the planet. Get Koyuchi. Right now, get 15% off your entire order when you visit Koyuchi.com. That's koyuchi.com to get 15% percent. sent off. C-O-Y-U-C-H-I.com. Is Donald Trump seriously considering destroying the National

Archive containing all presidential papers, not just his own? Is he seriously considering destroying presidential and vice-presidential papers and not turning them over pursuant to the Presidential Records Act? That is a question that's being asked by a brand new filing in breaking news by the American Historical Association and American Oversight, who are now now before Judge Beryl Howell, who knows Donald Trump well, because she presided over that criminal case involving election interference in Donald Trump in the District of Columbia when she was the chief judge. She's been assigned to the case. The Trump administration's not happy about it, have taken steps to try to remove her because they don't like her, but she's not going anywhere.

And she's now issued an order that she wants a response to the new motion for preliminary injunction as to whether Donald Trump is going to comply with the Presidential Records Act or not, or is he going to take a flamethrower, a blowtorch to the people's papers? I mean, one comment, though, I know they're doing this in a methodical way, and I've appreciated everything the American Historical Association and American Oversight is done. But if it's true, as you've reported in your filing, that you reached out to the Trump administration, and they refused, refused to agree not to destroy things, including the National Archive,

during dependency of the case, I think you have the grounds for a temporary restraining order on an emergency basis. Because there's now a gap. The judge is trying to close the gap. She wants a briefing schedule by later this week. But still, he could do a lot of damage. The presidency is in charge of the National Archives. It's an executive branch.

And the argument that Donald Trump is making is that, well, my lawyers, literally his lawyers in the Department of Justice, the Office of Legal Counsel that worked for him, told him in a 50-page memo just last week that the 1977 Supreme Court precedent of Nixon versus the General Services Administration, which was about the predecessor to the Presidential Records Act, about President Nixon, the last criminal president's, illegal tape recording of people while in the White House and his papers, millions and millions of pieces of paper, they argued, well, Congress can't require me to turn over all the tapes, can't require me to turn over all the records of the president. That's the legislative branch. Separation of powers. Are we done here? And the Supreme Court in 1977, which is the prevailing precedent, said, no. Congress is allowed as the keeper of all property under the property Clause of the Constitution that belongs to the people, whether personal in nature or private in nature, it's the people's papers, the people's property, and the landlord for that is Congress.

And they can direct another archive for executive papers, not the current occupant of the White House, you know, for posterity purposes, to make sure they're not destroyed. And so their argument, the Supreme Court's rationale, jurisprudential analytic, is that there's no separation of powers problem. Congress owns the papers pursuant to the property clause, and they're not directing that the papers get deposited in the Library of Congress. They're alleging that they're arguing that or ruling that the papers get delivered to another branch of the executive like a time capsule for the future.

These are the arguments that Donald Trump is raising now in his Office of Legal Counsel memo last week that said, no, that was wrong. You can do what you want with the papers. destroy the National Archive if you want. Now, as I previously reported here on Midas Touch and on Legal A.F. Did I mention we have a YouTube channel called Legal A.F? And that you should subscribe? Yeah, you should.

While Donald Trump's in control of this apparatus, I mean, Mark Rubio was until recently the acting archivist, if you can believe it. They can do a lot of damage. And so the lawsuit was filed. after this memo came out that said the Supreme Court precedent was wrong, and then you had the new filing. Now you've got the motion for preliminary injunction, and this fight over who should be the judge?

See, Donald Trump's big tell, like he's got an itchy nose during, or blinks his eyes a lot, or twitches during a poker game, what he has cards he likes or whatever, is that he doesn't like Beryl Howell. Now, Barrel Howell, she was the chief judge. She did some things in the cases. involving Donald Trump's criminal prosecution. She stripped some people of attorney-client privilege.

She made them testify against Donald Trump and grand jury proceedings. She lets some subpoenas get issued. You know, and she's done some things in the Jan 6 sentencing and trials. She's done some things involving the Trump administration. When it comes to immigration law, the Alien Enemies Act, his attempt to make law firms bend the knee and pay money. She's been right. She's been right. right there, ringside to history, if you will. They can't wait to get rid of her. So they argued that when, see, when you file a case in federal court, I'll speak to you now as a practitioner. When you file a case, there's a civil cover sheet. You fill out the parties. You fill out maybe some related parties so that they know what's going on. You check the box about what the case is about, the amount

controversy, the jurisdiction, and all of that. It's a basic, it's literally a form. But in there, if you believe there is a related case that relates directly to this one so that this case should be sent to the same judge, you check the box, you list the case number, and how it's related. Well, they did that because there was a similar freedom of information act request that went out by American oversight on some of these issues, and it was handled by Beryl Howell. So who better to have the underlying substantive lawsuit than Beryl Howell? Okay, and nobody had been assigned to the case anyway. And the clerk of the court agreed and assigned it to Beryl Howell. oh, that Donald Trump didn't like that.

They're not related. They shouldn't be related. Why don't they just come out and say the truth? They don't like Beryl Howell and they want to get rid of her as a judge. You know, of course, when they have a judge they love, like ALED candidates, like, oh, well, let's put everything in front of her down in Florida. So effectively, Beryl Howell has ruled already because she asked for a briefing schedule on this particular injunction hearing motion. She wants it by sometime this week. I think she's going to have them all.

I think the briefing is going to be done by next week and she's going to have them in for a conference. Now, there is a threat that they're going to destroy in the meantime. I think that's a real threat. That's why I would have moved for a temporary restraining order. Sorry to be a Monday morning quarterback, armchair quarterback, but listen, I've been doing this. I've been doing this a long time, too. So with that, I can take some shots. I can make some comments. Now, presidential and vice presidential records, any records of the government, supremely important, Freedom of Information Act requests go to government entities in order to get information. Many times from a Freedom of Information Act, a FOIA request, later is filed a very large lawsuit.

You know, sometimes from the outside, it's so opaque that the lawyers and the organizations are like, we think these two things are going on. And then you get the documents, turns out, no, you were wrong. There were three other things that were going on. In fact, I had Sky Perryman, whose group democracy forward is constantly filing dozens and dozens and dozens of information and records requests through FOIA. And a case like this would impact because if Donald Trump had his way, the whole National Archive would be set aflame. Here's what she told me during an interview yesterday about the purpose of having a freedom of Information Act records request at the beginning of a case and how as the as the administration

continues, the longer it's in office, the more these information requests for records are so important. Play the clip. You know? Yeah, and our team, I just have to call it out. I mean, we have, so we have our general litigation team at Democracy Forward, which we talk so many about their cases. And we have a specific oversight team. And we have people that are filing literally thousands of record requests as we, as people as we need to get to the bottom of things. And then we have some phenomenal lawyers, including Dan McGrath and others who are on that complaint, Rob Thurston, others that filed these, that then come in and file the, that file the lawsuits in order to enforce those requests. That is something that's happening nearly 24-7 at Democracy Ford.

While many of our other cases are always in the news, you know, we block detentions of people, block more, at least arrest, all the things you expect us to do, this is really important. It becomes much more important now that we're in year two of this administration. it will be more important in year three and year four because there's more information to know there's more pieces we can put together and so that's a big piece of our strategy what percentage i'm just going to if you don't know it you can just rough it out what percentage do you think of the cases that you've brought that we're familiar with started as a freedom of information act requests so well i will tell you by the time we get to the end of the administration it will be a large percentage

because that's sort of how this works now of course at the beginning of an administration i mean we to come out of the gate and file a bunch of cases day one because he was doing all kinds of things day one, well, there's not a freedom of information act request because it's the government. So you're going to see, so now you will start seeing more and more. Sometimes we just get the documents. We don't have to sue on them. And the documents help us frame out our complaints.

And you'll start seeing that. Other times we have to sue to get the documents and those inform, just for those at home, like they inform things that are happening. And we realize, oh, my gosh, we thought they violated the last. law in two ways, but guess what? Now they violated the law in four ways and it allows us to come in. I'm so excited to tell you about Bullshot, the high-performance foam cleaning sprays. I've been using Bullshot regularly. And the one I depend on most is their carpet cleaner. I've had some older set in stains that I honestly thought were permanent and this stuff actually lifts them out. You can see the Bull strength foam working in real time as it breaks everything down, which is incredibly

satisfying. What really stands out is that it doesn't just clean the surface. It goes deep to lift tough stains and completely neutralizes odors instead of just masking them. It dries fast, leaves no sticky residue, and I've used that on everything from carpets and rugs to upholstery and even car mats. So I don't need a bunch of different cleaners. And it's proudly made in the USA, which I always appreciate. No matter the mess. Bullshots, professional strength leaders, handle it all. From carpet stains to pet odors to kitchen grease, just shake, point, and spray. Quality you can trust backed by a 100% satisfaction guarantee.

And now for a limited time, get up to 20% off Bullshot and free shipping when you text Legal 20 to 64,000. That's legal 20 to 64,000 for up to 20% off and free shipping. text legal 20 to 64,000 message and data rates may apply. So here's the argument that they raise about Nixon versus the General Services Administration from 1977, which is the prevailing precedent. They say that under it was on page two, that the legislation does not, the legislation, which was the predecessor to the Presidential Records Act,

does not violate the separation of powers, including because it does, not impermissively interfere with the ability to carry out its constitutional functions. We're talking about papers, not interference with functionality. Even if they're right, which they're not in the White House, that Nixon versus GSA was wrongly decided, inviting it to be re-decided by the new United States Supreme Court, the Presidential Records Act is still on the book, and it is constitutional. Congress has clear authority to enact, they say, on page two, on page two, the Presidential Records Act under the Property Clause of Article 4 of the Constitution,

which the Supreme Court has held affords Congress power over the disposition of government property, sole power, both real and personal. The Office of Legal Counsel remarkably ignores this source of constitutional authority, even though it was the primary authority, the Department of Justice relied upon in defending the Presidential Records Act predecessor in the court. Then they go into what they're seeking and why they're here. And so here's what they're seeking in terms of an injunction. The court should grant a plaintiff, a motion for preliminary injunction as follows, an injunction that all defendants and their employees are preliminarily enjoined, not to destroy and preserve in the custody of the federal government, presidential or vice presidential

records. All defendants and their employees are preliminarily enjoined not to create or send a presidential or vice presidential record using a non-official electronic message account like signal. See, this was the very thing they told the judge. We tried to get the other side to agree not to burn down the house while this case was going on, and they refused. See, I think that gets you into court a lot faster. And don't use a signal disappearing app for your messaging unless you connect it to something that can be saved and salvaged.

And then let the court know if you're destroying anything. That's a pretty good injunction. This is going to go fast. Beryl Howell in her order, she ordered that there be a briefing schedule this week, set up this week for the future. I think she'll one way or the other, she'll tell the Trump administration they got a week to answer. I think before April is done, she's going to rule. And I don't think it's going to be in favor of Donald Trump and the Trump administration and the violation of the Presidential Records Act and or the seminal case, 1970. of Nixon versus the General Services Administration.

I'll follow it all here. I'm glad you're here on Legal AF and Midas Dutch. Come over to Legal AF YouTube channel, hit the free subscribe button. Help us get to 1.1 million subscribers. Until my next report, this is Michael. Can't get your fill of Legal A.F. Me neither. That's why we formed the Legal A.F. substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take,

whether it's a court filing or an oral argument, come over to the substack. You'll find the court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do call, wait for it, morning A.F. What else? All the other contributors from LegalAF are there as well. We got some new reporting. We got interviews. We got ad-free versions of the podcast and hot takes where legal A-F on substack. Come over now to free subscribe.